Οριοθετημένη Ανασκόπηση Άρθρων

Introduction

The scoping review of articles is a relatively modern methodological approach in the research process, aimed at the preliminary assessment of the range and nature of available literature within a specific field. Unlike the systematic review, which seeks to answer a specific and narrowly defined research question, the scoping review focuses on exploring the broader landscape of knowledge surrounding a topic. In this way, it contributes to identifying gaps in the existing literature and highlighting directions for future research.

Definition and Purpose of the Scoping Review

The scoping review is characterized by its ability to collect and map existing research evidence without necessarily attempting to assess it in depth. Its primary purpose is to describe the nature, scope, and types of studies that exist on a given subject. Through this process, a better understanding of the field, its main themes, and potential research gaps is achieved. This method is particularly useful when the research topic is broad, complex, or multidimensional. It enables the researcher to develop a general overview of the available knowledge and decide whether it is worthwhile to proceed later with a more systematic and in-depth investigation.

Methodological Approach and Flexibility

One of the key features of the scoping review is its flexibility. In contrast to the strict procedures of systematic reviews or meta-analyses, the scoping review allows the use of diverse sources and types of data. It may include both qualitative and quantitative studies, theoretical or narrative reviews, as well as grey literature—that is, sources not published in scientific journals, such as reports, dissertations, or research projects. This methodological flexibility makes the scoping review ideal for fields in which the literature is extensive or heterogeneous. Although the depth of analysis it provides is not as detailed as that of a systematic review, it offers a broader conceptual framework that is valuable for mapping existing knowledge.

Differences from Other Types of Reviews

The main difference between a scoping review and a systematic review lies in their purpose and analytical scope. The systematic review focuses on a specific research question, using strict protocols for selecting and evaluating studies. In contrast, the scoping review aims to explore a broader field, to identify what exists in the literature, and to map the available sources. Moreover, the scoping review allows for the simultaneous inclusion of different methodologies. While the systematic review seeks maximum accuracy and comparability, the scoping review focuses more on providing a comprehensive overview of the knowledge landscape and identifying potential areas for further investigation.

Advantages and Limitations

The scoping review offers significant advantages, as it enables the researcher to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic, identify prevailing trends, and recognize research gaps. It is particularly useful in the early stages of a research project, as it helps to shape the research question and theoretical framework. However, it also has limitations. The lack of focus on a specific question may lead to difficulties in interpreting or comparing results. Furthermore, since the process of evaluating studies is not as rigorous, a scoping review cannot provide the same level of evidence and validity as a systematic review.

Conclusions

In summary, the scoping review of articles is a flexible and particularly useful tool for the preliminary exploration of a research field. It offers a wide range of information, allowing for the understanding of existing knowledge and the identification of research gaps. Although it does not replace the systematic review, it effectively complements it by providing the necessary foundation for further, more focused investigations. In this way, it contributes substantially to the advancement of scientific knowledge and the improvement of the overall quality of the research process.